Emotion and the Law: A Framework for Inquiry

This paper draws on research in social and cognitive psychology to show how theories of judgment and decision making that incorporate decision makers' affective responses apply to legal contexts. It takes 2 widely used models of decision making, the rational actor and lens models, and illustrates their utility for understanding legal judgments by using them to interpret research findings on juror decision making, people's obedience to the law (e.g., paying taxes), and eyewitness memory. The paper concludes with a discussion of the advantages of modifying existing approaches to information processing to include the influence of affect on how legal actors reach judgments about law and legal process.     

A HEAVY THUMB ON THE SCALE: THE EFFECT OF VICTIM IMPACT EVIDENCE ON CAPITAL DECISION MAKING*

The past several decades have seen the emergence of a movement in the criminal justice system that has called for a greater consideration for the rights of victims. One manifestation of this movement has been the “right” of victims or victims' families to speak to the sentencing body through what are called victim impact statements about the value of the victim and the full harm that the offender has created. Although victim impact statements have been a relatively noncontroversial part of regular criminal trials, their presence in capital cases has had a more contentious history. The U.S. Supreme Court overturned previous decisions and explicitly permitted victim impact testimony in capital cases in Payne v. Tennessee (1991) . The dissenters in that case argued that such evidence only would arouse the emotions of jurors and bias them in favor of imposing death. A body of research in behavioral economics on the “identifiable victim effect” and the “identifiable wrongdoer effect” would have supported such a view. Using a randomized controlled experiment with a death‐eligible sample of potential jurors and the videotape of an actual penalty trial in which victim impact evidence (VIE) was used, we found that these concerns about VIE are perhaps well placed. Subjects who viewed VIE testimony in the penalty phase were more likely to feel negative emotions like anger, hostility, and vengeance; were more likely to feel sympathy and empathy toward the victim; and were more likely to have favorable perceptions of the victim and victim's family as well as unfavorable perceptions of the offender. We found that these positive feelings toward the victim and family were in turn related to a heightened risk of them imposing the death penalty. We found evidence that part of the effect of VIE on the decision to impose death was mediated by emotions of sympathy and empathy. We think our findings open the door for future work to put together better the causal story that links VIE to an increased inclination to impose death as well as explore possible remedies.     

Error Rates,Likelihood Ratios,and Jury Evaluation of Forensic Evidence

Forensic examiners regularly testify in criminal cases, informing the jurors whether crime scene evidence likely came from a source. In this study, we examine the impact of providing jurors with testimony further qualified by error rates and likelihood ratios, for expert testimony concerning two forensic disciplines: commonly used fingerprint comparison evidence and a novel technique involving voice comparison. Our method involved surveying mock jurors in Amazon Mechanical Turk (N = 897 laypeople) using written testimony and judicial instructions. Participants were more skeptical of voice analysis and generated fewer “guilty” decisions than for fingerprint analysis (B = 2.00, OR = 7.06, p = <0.000). We found that error rate information most strongly decreased “guilty” votes relative to no qualifying information for participants who heard fingerprint evidence (but not those that heard voice analysis evidence; B = −1.16, OR = 0.32, p = 0.007). We also found that error rates and conclusion types led to a greater decrease on “guilty” votes for fingerprint evidence than voice evidence (B = 1.44, OR = 4.23, p = 0.021). We conclude that these results suggest jurors adjust the weight placed on forensic evidence depending on their prior views about its reliability. Future research should develop testimony and judicial instructions that can better inform jurors of the strengths and limitations of forensic evidence.     

The CSI Effect and the impact of DNA evidence on mock jurors and jury deliberations

ABSTRACT

The present research examined the CSI Effect and the impact of DNA evidence on mock jurors and jury deliberations using a 3 (Crime Drama Viewing: low, moderate, high)?×?3 (Evidence: DNA innocent, DNA guilty, no DNA control) design. A sample of 178 jury-eligible college students read a case of breaking and entering. Pre-deliberation, some support for a CSI Effect was found with high viewers’ extent of guilt ratings significantly lower than moderate and low viewers’ in the no DNA control and the DNA innocent conditions. This effect was not present for verdicts. Contrary to a CSI Effect, crime drama viewing was not related to guilt judgments with incriminating DNA evidence. A content analysis of comments made during deliberations found little support for the CSI Effect entering the jury room. Specifically, CSI Effect predictions were not supported when examining the discussion of DNA evidence, expressing DNA opinions, or mentioning missing evidence. Overall, the limited CSI Effect found for individuals was attenuated during deliberation. The alarm raised over a possible CSI Effect influencing jury decision making may be unwarranted.     

Perceived infallibility of detection dog evidence: implications for juror decision-making

This study focuses on the trust that potential jurors have in unsubstantiated evidence and the implications of such trust for legal decision-making. We examined whether participants’ motivation to think deeply (‘need for cognition,’ NC) and belief in science moderated their trust in potentially fallible detection dog evidence when selecting a verdict in a trial scenario. A detection dog twice indicated the presence of drugs in the scenario, yet no drugs were actually found. Those who chose a guilty verdict without drugs present featured stronger beliefs in detection dog evidence. They were also more confident that a dog alert indicated the presence of drugs, even though the scientific literature actually shows that detection dog evidence is subject to biases and other challenges to reliability. Our findings indicate that an unsubstantiated belief and trust in detection dog evidence may negatively influence juror decision-making, which may, in turn, pose consequences for fairness and justice. Participants believed that detection dogs provide powerful and reliable evidence, and these beliefs were clearly associated with stronger beliefs in science. These findings, therefore, raise serious concerns about jurors’ indiscriminate trust in forensic evidence, be it detection dog evidence or other lines of evidence presented in court.     

Understanding juror perceptions of forensic evidence: investigating the impact of case context on perceptions of forensic evidence strength

The most widely accepted model of juror decision making acknowledges the importance of both the case-specific information presented in the courtroom, as well as the prior general knowledge and beliefs held by each juror. The studies presented in this paper investigated whether mock jurors could differentiate between evidence of varying strengths in the absence of case information and then followed on to determine the influence that case context (and therefore the story model) has on judgments made about the strength of forensic DNA evidence. The results illustrated that mock jurors correctly identified various strengths of evidence when it was not presented with case information; however, the perceived strength of evidence was significantly inflated when presented in the context of a criminal case, particularly when the evidence was of a weak or ambiguous standard. These findings are discussed in relation to the story model, and the potential implications for real juries.     

Strength of Evidence,Extraevidentiary Influence,and the Liberation Hypothesis: Data from the Field

To examine relationships between strength of evidence (SOE) and extraevidentiary variables in the context of Kalven and Zeisel’s (The American Jury, 1966) liberation hypothesis, post-trial questionnaire data were collected from judges, attorneys, and jurors associated with 179 criminal jury trials. SOE ratings were strongly correlated with jury verdicts on the three most serious charges against the defendant, and several extraevidentiary variables (i.e., pretrial publicity, trial complexity, charge severity, and foreperson demographics) were moderately correlated with verdicts. Extraevidentiary-verdict relationships remained significant when SOE was controlled, although extraevidentiary variables yielded only modest improvement in classification accuracy beyond SOE. In partial support of the liberation hypothesis, several case-related extraevidentiary variables were significantly related to jury verdicts only when the prosecution’s evidence was rated as moderately strong.     

Identifying and measuring juror pre-trial bias for forensic evidence: development and validation of the Forensic Evidence Evaluation Bias Scale

Abstract

Previous research has provided support for the impact of juror pre-trial bias on judicial decision making, particularly in cases where the evidence presented at trial is of weak or ambiguous probative value. In an effort to identify whether a pre-trial bias for forensic evidence exists, the Forensic Evidence Evaluation Bias Scale (FEEBS) was developed and tested. The results of a principal components analysis suggested that two distinct constructs were being measured, corresponding to a pro-prosecution and pro-defence bias toward forensic evidence. In a second validation study, scores on these two subscales were compared with other existing juror bias measures (Juror Bias Scale and Belief in a Just World) and in a mock juror decision making task only the pro-prosecution subscale of the FEEBS predicted the perceived strength of forensic evidence. A partial mediation model is presented which explains the relationship between this bias and verdict preferences. The implications of this potential juror bias are discussed in the context of real juries, the CSI Effect (which refers to anecdotal claims that jurors are biased by the popularity of fictional representations of forensic science on television) and peremptory challenges, as well as future research directions.     

Emotions and Attributions of Legal Responsibility and Blame: A Research Review

Research on the effects of emotions and moods on judgments of legal responsibility and blame is reviewed. Emotions and moods may influence decision makers in 3 ways: by affecting their information processing strategies, by inclining their judgments in the direction of the valence of the emotion or mood, and/or by providing informational cues to the proper decision. A model is proposed that incorporates these effects and further distinguishes among various affective influences in terms of whether the affect is provoked by a source integral or incidental to the judgment task, and whether it affects judgment directly (e.g., by providing an informational cue to judgment) or indirectly (e.g., by affecting construal of judgment target features, which in turn affects the judgment). Legal decision makers' abilities to correct for any affective influences they perceive to be undesirable and normative implications for legal theory and practice are briefly discussed.     

中国陪审制度研究——以成都市武侯区人民法院陪审工作为对象

中国陪审制度的诞生有其特殊的历史意义和政治作用。伴随着法治进程的发展，陪审的政治意味逐渐淡化，陪审制度本身的司法民主和司法公正价值获得越来越多的认可，然而也存在诸如缺乏具体法律规范、陪审员不能有效参与审判等许多弊端。陪审制度的具体运作过程显示，陪审员无论是在选任标准、参审方式还是具体审判情况都存在大量争议性问题，社会效果也不尽如人意。但是，陪审制度的存在符合人民群众的司法需求，能够在一定程度上体现司法民主及司法公正。当下，陪审制度的发展正处于一个瓶颈阶段，如何找到适合中国国情的陪审之路，如何使陪审制度走上规范化的道路，如何重新定位陪审制度的核心价值及基本功能和角色，是当前陪审制度的当务之急。，     

Some individual differences in perception of the evidence and the verdict choice

Abstract

For the last century, social research has provided evidence that contradicts the idea of objectivity in judicial procedure. As a result, research on jurors' potential bias has emerged. We propose an alternative to traditional jury, one in which social researchers collaborate with judges and lawyers, providing them with information on the juror bias. Legal authoritarianism is one of the characteristics of personality, which seems to be linked to juror verdicts. We present two studies, which develop a specific measure for this variable. The first study shows the relevance of legal authoritarianism as a variable to describe the psychological profile of juror-eligible respondents. The second study explores the relationship between legal authoritarianism and interpretation of the evidence, as well as the potential of this variable to predict verdicts.     

法国重罪陪审制度的启示与借鉴

陪审制度具有重要的政治意蕴与司法功能。在法国,对于法定刑较重的重大案件,实行以随机方式抽选一般国民担任陪审员,由陪审员与职业法官组成合议庭,共同审理案件,一起决定定罪量刑的制度。法国重罪陪审制度对于完善我国人民陪审员制度,如构建重罪、复杂案件由陪审团审理的制度,取消对陪审员学历的要求、确立科学的陪审员遴选程序与陪审团评议表决程序方面具有重要的借鉴意义。     

美国陪审团的一致裁决原则：历史与当下

陪审团的一致裁决原则起源于14世纪的英国,作为一项普通法的传统,它在美国确立后经历了一个联邦强制适用与各州选择适用并存这一局面被明确和强化的过程。虽然饱受质疑,但是从一致裁决原则对陪审团司法工具价值和政治民主价值的发挥及对审判成本控制的影响这三个角度出发综合考虑,其在一定时间内还将继续存在下去。     

Conduct and its Consequences: Attempts at Debiasing Jury Judgments

Jurors in negligence cases are supposed to judge a defendant by the reasonableness of his or her conduct and not by the consequences of that conduct. But several studies have shown that a cognitive heuristic known as hindsight bias can skew post hoc judgments of some prior behavior. Thus, jurors who must evaluate the actions of a defendant may be influenced inappropriately by the consequences of those actions. A complementary problem arises when jurors must evaluate the injuries incurred by the plaintiff. Here, jurors' knowledge about the defendant's allegedly negligent conduct can proactively influence their assessment of the plaintiff's injuries and determination of damages. The purpose of the present study was to examine the effectiveness of two procedural techniques intended to reduce or eliminate the impact of hindsight bias in negligence cases—multiple admonitions from a judge about the proper use of evidence—and bifurcation (actually withholding irrelevant evidence from jurors). We presented a re-enacted automobile negligence trial to 355 jury-eligible adults drawn from the community, varied the evidence and instructions that they heard, and measured liability judgments and damage awards from individual jurors both before and after deliberating, and from juries. Results showed that admonitions were generally ineffective in guiding jurors to the proper use of evidence but that bifurcation was relatively more effective. Deliberations had no curative effect on jurors' misapplication of evidence.     

英国陪审制度改革及其走向

近代陪审制度起源于英国,为资产阶级民主发展做出了贡献,但是在当前世界范围内陪审制却呈衰微之势。顺应历史潮流,英国的司法界正在探索新的道路改革陪审制度来适应社会发展需要。我们国家的陪审制度也在摸索前进之中,吸收借鉴英国陪审制度改革的有益经验,可以加快我国司法改革的进程。     

Effects of Testimonial Inconsistencies and Eyewitness Confidence on Mock-Juror Judgments

This study examined the interaction between testimonial consistency and eyewitness confidence on mock-jurors' judgments of probability that the defendant committed the crime and verdicts. In a 2 (testimonial consistency) × 2 (confidence) between-groups design, 130 mock-jurors listened to an audio-taped trial of a person charged with armed robbery. Manipulations were contained in the prosecution witness's responses to detailed questioning by prosecution and defense attorneys. Although consistency is considered to be a key marker of accuracy, its impact on judgments was weak and nonsignificant. Witness confidence had a strong influence on judgments, whether testimony was consistent or inconsistent. We suggested that witness confidence may be more likely to emerge as a dominant influence on juror judgments when the testimony is wide ranging rather than relatively brief and concerned only with a specific issue (e.g., identification confidence).     

领导决策风格量表的修订与应用研究

领导者的决策风格是领导班子配置的重要依据。罗的决策风格量表是目前国际上使用较为广泛的决策风格量表之一。本项研究依据心理测量学的有关原理和罗的决策风格量表编制的有关理论 ,从我国国情出发 ,对罗的决策风格量表进行了修订 ,并根据各类决策风格与人的个性因素之间的关系 ,对修订后的领导决策风格量表进行信度和效度的检验 ,为领导人才的开发提供了有用的工具     

数字证据、电子证据、科学证据、电子记录概念比较分析

与数字证据相关的概念很多,但它们的内涵和外延存在一定差异,从提出概念的出发点、载体、表现形式、研究范围等角度分析数字证据、电子证据、科学证据、电子记录等概念的差异,并进一步提出对数字证据进行专门研究的科学性和必要性。     

论成年人监护制度的最新发展:支持决策

支持决策是为响应联合国《残疾人权利公约》第12条的要求在成年人监护领域出现的新理念和新措施。支持决策的核心价值是使残疾人在他人的帮助下自主做出决定,从而维护残疾人的人格尊严与自由。支持决策在世界范围内受到极大关注,很多国家都在尝试建立支持决策的法律模式。我国正处于民法典编纂过程中,支持决策理念的出现为我国成年人监护立法提供了新思路、新方向。我国民法典婚姻家庭编在设计成年人监护制度时应以辅助制度体现支持决策的指导思想及具体内容。